Because <time> is an html5 element and I've not seen DoubleDee use html5 and the date isn't an abbreviation either, ergo there's no suitable element that fits which is why I'd then opt to use an element that has little semantic value.

I do see your reasoning but date isn't a proper abbreviation to me. And she has "Published" in there as well which makes it even less an abbreviation in my eyes. We'll have to agree to disagree on this point.Another thing that occurs to me is that it might be highly problematic using ABBR in terms of accessibility. Should the ABBR title attribute be read out in its entirety each time a date is present? It's confusing and impractical, IMHO.

I would use a <p> here (assuming a separate line) as a paragraph (in its traditional sense) represents a break in meaning or topic, which is kind of what this is. (Text that indicates a publish date is a break in meaning or subject that deserves its own line.)

Assuming it were a standalone online book then typically it would lend itself more to the P element in most cases if the date was supposed to be within the main body content of the page itself. Though we don't know what it is being used for it could even be a link.

Great explanations, Ralph and Paul. I've always opted for an element with low semantic value for the date, usually using a span if it's for simple article dates or a div if it's strongly separated from the rest of the content. But your logic makes a lot more sense in using a p instead. For whatever reason a date never warranted a paragraph to me but, alas, I can see how it actually is one.

In regards to time: This element is highly impratical, as it makes it impossible to use dates in HTML5 documents prior to year 0000 or after year 9999, in that negative years and years with more than four digits require prior agreement between those exchanging data, as per ISO 8601. In other words, HTML5 has taken a revisionist approach to ancient history, and does not view the future as being important.